From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA086A0562; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:03:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63DAE161BD2; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:03:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CA744013F for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:03:24 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: MvT/UaYkxCnxgotAcDqEVqKda0/surDwm/4gqkjwxeizHIVTAZ27saevTOLzCH4Qluef05ujML 3HTGYO1ush3Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,9954"; a="192560895" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,222,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="192560895" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Apr 2021 10:03:02 -0700 IronPort-SDR: 74+vDGfhe6p5OQSJt0etYiVmIUoaNfSNhRMFLoWYE2RxnK1kagcmYpjcoZ3cDd8Wep4ax9XWdA i5MghZAT/uOA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,222,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="424819184" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.252.7.48]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 14 Apr 2021 10:03:01 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:02:58 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: David Marchand , dev Message-ID: <20210414170258.GF514@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20210216094300.27889-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20210216095140.GA136@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <20210414092938.22d017a8@hermes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210414092938.22d017a8@hermes.local> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: support using 0 as coremask for no-affinitization X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 09:29:38AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:15:34 +0200 > David Marchand wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 10:52 AM Bruce Richardson > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 09:43:00AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > > > Allow the user to specify that they don't want any core pinning from DPDK > > > > by passing in the coremask of 0. > > > > --- > > > > > > Apologies, missed my signoff, will add in V2, but will wait for feedback on > > > this V1 first. > > > > I did not see a v2, is this still for 21.05? > > > > What are the usecases for this feature? > > I could think of using this in combination with external threads in > > applications like OVS... ? > > > > > > It would cause lots of DPDK applications to discover the problems with > preemption and priority inversion with DPDK spinlocks... I'd actually be surprised. I would expect most apps that want this sort of thing are already just using a single master core (perhaps with faked EAL args) and adding their own threads on top of that. All this patch would do is remove the requirement for that master lcore. /Bruce